The Court of Queen's Bench, on Thursday, tried an action
brought by the Reverend Mr. Dundas, son of Captain Deans Dammam, M.P., against Mr. Hoey, a gentleman residing in Bath, for criminal conver- sation with Mrs, Dundas. From time speeches of counsel, and front the evidence, it appeared that Mrs. Pundits is the daughter of Colonel :Burstein, of I firewood Lodge, nut far from Barton Court, Captain Deans Dundas 's residence in Berkshire ; that the plaintiff paid atten- tion to Miss Burstein, a young lady of great personal beauty, twenty-two years old, and was received in the house as her acknowledged suitor ; that he took advantage of the familiarity allowed him to seduce the lady, whom he then deserted, and who was delivered at Bath of a child by him; that, with great difficulty, he was persuaded to marry her some time after the birth of' the child; that woo/. was settled by Colonel Burslem on his daugh- ter, and 5,000/. by Captain 'Sondes on his son ; that the married pair had violent quarrels, and were twice separated ; and it was after the last separation that Mrs. Pundits formed the illicit connexion with Mr. Hoey. It was proved that at various places they hind lived together as man and wife. Mrs. Burstein was produced to state the circum- stances of the courtship, the seduction, the delivery, and the subsequent marriage of her own daughter. The plaintiffs counsel, Mr Thesiger, did not, under the circumstances, claim more than nominal damages. Lord Denman summed up, rather favourably for the plaintiff. The Jury, in a few minutes, returned a verdict for the plaintiff—damages one farthing; and added, " We think he had morally deserted her."
Lord Denman—" Do you think he had completely abandoned her, and given her to understand so?"
The Jury—" My Lord, we find for the plaintiff, with one farthing damages." Mr. Thesiger asked his Lordship to certify that it was a proper case to be tried by a special Jury. Lord Dennian—" Yes, I shall."
Mr. Watson—" May I ask your Lordship to certify to deprive the plaintiff of 1113 costs."
Lord Denman—" I will consider of it."
'The Court of Exchequer was occupied on Saturday with the trial of an action brought by Mr. Morgan, on behalf of his son, a minor, against Mr. Alexander Thorn, of Little Queen Street, Holborn, to obtain da. nines for Thom's adultery with the junior Mr. Morgan's wile. The circumstances, which were peculiar, and all confirmed by testimony given in court, were stated by Mr. Thesiger-
The case excited a very great deal of interest, not only from the relative position in society of the respective parties, but from the circumstances by which it was surrounded. The action was brought by the next friend of the plaintiff; that friend being his father, he not being yet of age. That gentle- mail had prosecuted the suit, not so much with the view of obtaining large damages, as that in the event of his being able to gain a verdict, he might then be in a condition to institute proceedings which might have the sired of reliev- ing his son from this unfortunate connexion. The union had taken place before the plaintiff had arrived at the age of seventeen years. The plaintiff was the son of a gentleman of large fortune, living in Shropshire; and the attach- ment had commenced, and the marrifqa, had taken plane whilst the plaintiff was vet at school, at Dr. Repton's, at Ealing. While there, it appeared the plaintiff Ltd become enamoured of the charms of the young female to whom he had subsequently been united. This young lady was the daughter of the post- mistress at Ealing. There was, however, no reason to imagine that the mother had been in any way cognisant of the allhir, eit her prior to the ceremony or at its performanee. In fact, the matter might truly be denominated a "clan- destine marriage." or course, the parents of the plaintiff were squally ignorant of the existence of the attachment. Miss Elizabeth Lawford, for that was the maiden 11■000 of Mrs.iMoigan, had caused time banns to be published in another parish ; amid there time parties had ultimately been married, on the 24th of April IS:a% As he had before stated, theplaintiff at that time was not seventeen. It would readily be conceived what had been time feelings of the parents of the VOUllg gentleman on the ducts reaching their ears : it was the source of the greatest annoyance and distress, because, however 'virtuous and correetly-behaved the party might be, and being so was a fit wife for any man in her own rank and station in life, still there were certain gradations in society which rendered it almost a matter of necessity that parties who entered into the solemn compact of marriage, milli a due consideration to their future happiness and comfort in life, should be Lord Abinger had considerable doubt whether he ought to allow the case to go to the Jury ; there being no evidence that the husband wished to be separated from his wife. At any rate, the damages must be no- minal ; especially as there was no proof that the defendant knew Mrs. Morgan to he an married woman. Mr. Thesiger admitted that the damages must be nominal ; but, with a view to ulterior proceedings, he wished to prove the identity of the parties. Mr. Fitzroy Kelly had been engaged to " lead" for the defendant, but being called into another Court, he left Mr. Charles Phillips to make an impromptu speech to the Jury ; and that gentleman received a compliment front Lord Abinger for the skill and eloquence with which he got through the unexpected task. Verdict for ale plaintiff—damages one skilliny. An action for breach of promise of marriage was tried on Tuesday in the Court of Common Pleas, in which Miss Esther Allnutt, aged twenty-six, the youngest daughter of a farmer residing at Hendon, Ox- fordshire, was the plaintiff, and the Reverend Mr. Enstace, a Dissent- ing minister, living at Nuneaton, Warwickshire, was the defendant. The necessary evidence was given to prove the case, and the Jury re- turned a verdict for the plaintiff—damages 1304
Previous page
